Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 115
9/1/2025, 8:18:45 PM
X
In reply to:
Matt Lieberman馃嚭馃嚘
@social_brains
路
14d
@Herroldo @jillnephew @GaryMarcus If AI isn鈥檛 making you smarter you are using it wrong
Harry
@Herroldo
路
14d
@jillnephew @social_brains @GaryMarcus Disagree. Look at the recent study on Dr's losing their ability to diagnose cancer correctly after relying on AI. If anything, reliance on LLMs seems to destroy or attack one's ability to apply critical thinking. It's the Cliff's Notes to intelligence.
Jill Nephew
@jillnephew
路
15d
@Herroldo @social_brains @GaryMarcus I think people will argue that you can use an LLM to challenge your thinking and bring in more context. So "smarter" is a proxy for "getting the correct answer with less thinking". Challenging your own thinking is a hard cognitive task and maybe a sign of ultimate "smartness".
Harry
@Herroldo
路
15d
@jillnephew @social_brains @GaryMarcus Only smart as long as the power is on and he has access to an AI provider? I don't consider that intelligence. Is a parrot smarter than the person it is imitating just by repeating what it's heard? No.
Jill Nephew
@jillnephew
路
15d
@social_brains @GaryMarcus Can you be more specific? How do you think they are making you smarter (love to have an explanation of your proposed mechanism, since this is your wheelhouse...)?
Matt Lieberman馃嚭馃嚘
@social_brains
路
16d
@GaryMarcus I agree that AGI is unlikely to come from the current LLM architecture, but LLMs are the most consequential invention of my lifetime. It has made me smarter and more efficient in 100 different ways. Far more pros than cons.

The statement engages in public discourse by contributing to a debate on the impact of AI on human intelligence and critical thinking. It challenges the notion that AI necessarily enhances intelligence by citing empirical data suggesting a decline in diagnostic skills and educational outcomes.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not use harmful language and presents an argument based on empirical data, adhering to the principle of doing no harm.聽[+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by introducing empirical data to the discussion, encouraging a more nuanced view of AI's impact.聽[+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by questioning the previous assertions with data, without resorting to personal attacks.聽[+1]